Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 1996 / Notices

These goals are, in paraphrase, to (1)

identify environmental concerns

associated with the GIWW in the

Laguna Madre, (2) develop scopes of

work needed to address environmental

concerns, (3) ensure effective team work

among state and federal agencies, and

(4) contribute to and expedite

completion of the dredged material

management plan and environmental

study for the GIWW.

Study Status

To address these goals, the ICT has

identified a problem list of concerns in

the Laguna Madre associated with

dredging and dredged material

placement. Some of these concerns

include:

• Impacts on the benthic community

• Effects of turbidity

• Impacts on seagrass populations

• Effects on circulation and

hydrodynamics

• Effects on fishery productivity

• Contaminant concerns

• Viability of alternate placement

areas

• Potential for beneficial uses of

dredged material

The ICT has developed and approved

several scopes of work to perform the

necessary scientific studies to address

these concerns. A variety of expertise is

being utilized. The approved studies,

the contractors, date of study initiation,

and the estimated costs are shown

below.

• Environmental Monitoring of

Dredging and Processes in the Lower

Laguna Madre. Texas A&M University,

Conrad Blucher Institute-August

1994-$300,000

• Environmental Monitoring of

Dredging and Processes in the Vicinity

of Baffin Bay. Texas A&M University,

Conrad Blucher Institute-October

1994-$328,769

• Hydrographic Characterization and

Bottom Characterization, Laguna Madre,

Texas. U.S. Army Waterways

Experiment Station-February 1995-

$586,550

• Temporal and Spatial Effects of

Open Water Dredge Material Disposal

on Habitat Utilization by Fishery

Species in Laguna Madre, Texas.

National Marine Fisheries Service-July

1995-$581,800

• Review of Available Water and

Sediment Quality Data in the Laguna

Madre. Espey, Huston, and AssociatesJuly 1995-$22,722

Several other studies are currently

under consideration by the ICT. The

anticipated contractor and estimated

costs include:

• Extension of the Monitoring in the

Lower Laguna Madre.

Texas A&M University, Conrad Blucher

Institute-$ 190,000

• Extension of the Monitoring in the

Upper Laguna Madre. Texas A&M

University, Conrad Blucher Institute-

$140,000

• Sediment Characteristics, History,

and Recent Transport, Laguna Madre,

Texas. University of Texas, Bureau of

Economic Geology-$310,000

• Laguna Madre Fluid Mud Survey.

U.S. Army Waterways Experiment

Station-$125, 000

• Laguna Madre Open Water Dredged

Material Disposal Study. U.S. Army

Waterways Experiment Station-

$165,000

• Predictive Model of Seagrass

Impact. Texas A&M University,

University of Texas Marine Science

Institute, and Texas Parks and Wildlife

Department-$400,000

• Hydrodynamic Circulation of the

Upper and Lower Laguna Madre.

Contractor and cost are as yet

undetermined

The total cost of both approved and

proposed studies is approximately

$3,150,000, not including the

Hydrodynamic Model.

Schedule

The efforts to date are considered to

be the first year of a four-year effort. The

ICT has tentatively established this time

frame to complete the studies, develop

the long-term management plan, and

prepare a supplemental Environmental

Impact Statement. Should the study

results indicate, and the ICT agree, that

the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) process as described above

should be modified, a separate notice

will be published describing how the

Corps will achieve NEPA compliance.

In the interim, maintenance dredging of

the GIWW will continue only when

necessary, although changes to the

placement plan will be made as study

results warrant.

Public Participation

The ICT is soliciting public input as

to the problems that need to be

addressed and other study efforts that

may be needed. Every effort will be

made to address concerns identified.

Additionally, a series of public

workshops to solicit input and concerns

on this study are planned within the

next several months.

Dated: February 6, 1996.

Robert B. Gatlin,

Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Engineer.

[FR Doc. 96-3276 Filed 2-13-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710-92-M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy

[Case No. DH-005]

5755

Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products : Granting of the

Application for Interim Waiver and

Publishing of the Petition for Waiver of

Superior Fireplace Company From the

DOE Vented Home Heating Equipment

Test Procedure

AGENCY : Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy, Department of

Energy.

ACTION : Notice.

SUMMARY: Today's notice grants an

Interim Waiver to Superior Fireplace

Company (Superior) from the existing

Department of Energy (DOE or

Department) test procedure regarding

pilot light energy consumption and

weighted average steady-state efficiency

for its manually controlled vented

heaters, models GI-3821, DSH-36T,

DVH-33R, DVH-33T, DVA-33R, and

DVA-33T.

Today's notice also publishes a

"Petition for Waiver" from Superior.

Superior's Petition for Waiver requests

DOE to grant relief from the DOE vented

home heating equipment test procedure

relating to the use of pilot light energy

consumption in calculating the Annual

Fuel Utilization Efficiency (AFUE) and

the calculation of weighted average

steady state efficiency of its models GI3821, DSH-36T, DVH-33R, DVH-33T,

DVA-33R, and DVA-33T vented

heaters. Superior seeks to delete the

required pilot light measurement (Q,) in

the calculation of AFUE when the pilot

is off, and to test at a minimum fuel

input rate of two-thirds instead of the

specified ±5 percent of 50 percent of the

maximum fuel input rate in the

calculation of AFUE. The Department is

soliciting comments, data, and

information respecting the Petition for

Waiver.

DATES : DOE will accept comments, data,

and information not later than March

15, 1996.

ADDRESSES : Written comments and

statements shall be sent to: Department

of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy, Case No. DH005, Mail Stop EE-43, Room 1J-018,

Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence

Avenue SW., Washington, D.C. 20585-

0121, (202) 586-7140.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William W. Hui, U.S. Department of

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy, Mail Station EE-431,

 CAS-RM-79-104 COMMENT 140
5756 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 1996 / Notices

Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence

Avenue SW., Washington, D.C. 20585-

0121, (202) 586-9145

Eugene Margolis, Esq., U.S. Department

of Energy, Office of General Counsel,

Mail Station GC-72, Forrestal

Building, 1000 Independence Avenue

SW., Washington, D.C. 20585-0103,

(202) 586-9507.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products (other than

automobiles) was established pursuant

to the Energy Policy and Conservation

Act, as amended (EPCA), which requires

DOE to prescribe standardized test

procedures to measure the energy

consumption of certain consumer

products, including vented home

heating equipment. The intent of the

test procedures is to provide a

comparable measure of energy

consumption that will assist consumers

in making informed purchasing

decisions. These test procedures appear

at Title 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B.

The Department amended the test

procedure rules to provide for a waiver

process by adding § 430.27 to Title 10

CFR Part 430, 45 FR 64108, September

26, 1980. Subsequently, DOE amended

the waiver process to allow the

Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy (Assistant

Secretary) to grant an Interim Waiver

from test procedure requirements to

manufacturers that have petitioned DOE

for a waiver of such prescribed test

procedures. Title 10 CFR Part 430,

§ 430.27(a)(2).

The waiver process allows the

Assistant Secretary to waive temporarily

test procedures for a particular basic

model when a petitioner shows that the

basic model contains one or more

design characteristics which prevent

testing according to the prescribed test

procedures, or when the prescribed test

procedures may evaluate the basic

model in a manner so unrepresentative

of its true energy consumption as to

provide materially inaccurate

comparative data. Waivers generally

remain in effect until final test

procedure amendments become

effective, resolving the problem that is

the subject of the waiver.

An Interim Waiver will be granted if

it is determined that the applicant will

experience economic hardship if the

Application for Interim Waiver is

denied, if it appears likely that the

Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/

or the Assistant Secretary determines

that it would be desirable for public

policy reasons to grant immediate relief

pending a determination on the Petition

for Waiver. Title 10 CFR Part 430,

§ 430.27(g). An Interim Waiver remains

in effect for a period of 180 days, or

until DOE issues a determination on the

Petition for Waiver, whichever is

sooner, and may be extended for an

additional 180 days, if necessary.

On August 30, 1995, Superior filed an

Application for Interim Waiver and a

Petition for Waiver regarding (a) pilot

light energy consumption and (b)

weighted average steady state efficiency.

On November 30, 1995, Superior

submitted a letter to DOE requesting a

modification to the minimum fuel input

rate of the vented heaters submitted for

consideration in the August 30, 1995

Waiver requests. On January 12, 1996,

Superior Fireplace Company submitted

a letter providing a list of companies

that make similar products, confidential

product performance data, and

amending the list of models submitted

for consideration in the August 30,

1995, Waiver requests.

Superior seeks an Interim Waiver

from the DOE test provisions in section

3.5 of Title 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B,

Appendix 0, that require measurement

of energy input rate of the pilot light

(Qi,), and the use of this data in section

4.2.6 for the calculation of AFUE,

where:

AFUE=(44001 1l Qin-max)

/(4400r1ssQin_max + 2.5(4600)x„ Q,,)

Instead, Superior requests that it be

allowed to delete Q,, and accordingly,

the (2.5(4600)ii Q,,) term in the

calculation of AFUE. Superior states

that instructions to turn off the transient

pilot by the user when the heater is not

in use are in the User Instruction

Manual and on a label adjacent to the

gas control valve. Therefore, the

additional energy savings that result

when the pilot is turned off (QF, = 0)

should be credited. Since the current

DOE test procedure does not address

pilot light energy savings, Superior asks

that the Interim Waiver be granted.

Superior also seeks an Interim Waiver

from the DOE test provisions in section

3.1.1 of Title 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart

B, Appendix 0, which require steady

state efficiency of manually controlled

vented heaters with various input rates

to be determined at a fuel input rate that

is within ±5 percent of 50 percent of the

maximum fuel input rate, and the use of

this data in section 4.2.4 to determine

the weighted average steady state

efficiency needed in the calculation of

AFUE. Instead, Superior requests that it

be allowed to determine steady state

efficiency, weighted average steady state

efficiency, and AFUE at a minimum fuel

input rate of two-thirds of the maximum

fuel input rate for its manually

controlled vented heaters which do not

adjust to an input rate as low as 50

percent. Since the current DOE test

procedure does not address steady state

testing for manually controlled vented

heaters with various input rates at fuel

input rates other than within ± 5 percent

of 50 percent of the maximum fuel input

rate, Superior asks that the waiver be

granted.

Previous Petitions for Waiver to

exclude the pilot light energy input term

in the calculation of AFUE for home

heating equipment with a manual

transient pilot control and allowance to

determine weighted average steady state

efficiency used in the calculation of

AFUE at a minimum fuel input rate of

65.3 percent of the maximum fuel input

rate instead of the specified ± 5 percent

of 50 percent of the maximum fuel input

rate have been granted by DOE to

Appalachian Stove and Fabricators, Inc.,

56 FR 51711, October 15, 1991, and

Valor Incorporated, 56 FR 51714,

October 15, 1991.

The Department published a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking on August 23,

1993, to amend the vented home heating

equipment test procedure, which would

allow the above issues. 58 FR 44583.

Thus, it appears likely that Superior's

Petition for Waiver for pilot light and

weighted average steady state efficiency

for home heating equipment will be

granted. In those instances where the

likely success of the Petition for Waiver

has been demonstrated based upon DOE

having granted a waiver for a similar

product design, it is in the public

interest to have similar products tested

and rated for energy consumption on a

comparable basis.

Therefore, based on the above, DOE is

granting Superior an Interim Waiver for

its models GI-3821, DSH-36T, DVH33R, DVH-33T, DVA-33R, and DVA33T vented heaters. Superior shall be

permitted to test its models GI-3821,

DSH-36T, DVH-33R, DVH-33T, DVA33R, and DVA-33T vented heaters on

the basis of the test procedures specified

in Title 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B,

Appendix 0, with the modifications set

forth below:

(i) Delete paragraph 3.5 of Appendix

0.

(ii) Delete paragraph 4.2.4 of

Appendix 0 and replace with the

following paragraph:

4.2.4 Weighted Average Steady-State

Efficiency. (a) For manually controlled

heaters with various input rates, the

weighted average steady-state efficiency

(Tlss-WT) is:

(1) At ± 5 percent of 50 percent of the

maximum fuel input rate as measured in

either section 3.1.1 to this appendix for

manually controlled gas vented heaters

or section 3.1.2 to this appendix for

 CAS-RM-79-104 COMMENT 140
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 1996 / Notices

manually controlled oil vented heaters,

or,

(2) At the minimum fuel input rate as

measured in either section 3.1.1 to this

appendix for manually controlled gas

vented heaters or section 3.1.2 to this

appendix for manually controlled oil

vented heaters if the design of the heater

is such that ±5 percent of 50 percent of

the maximum fuel input rate can not be

set, provided the tested input rate is no

greater than two-thirds of maximum

input rate of the heater.

(b) For manually controlled heater

with one single firing rate, the weighted

average steady-state efficiency is the

steady-state efficiency measured at the

single firing rate.

(iii) Delete paragraph 4.2.6 of

Appendix 0 and replace with the

following paragraph:

4.2.6 Annual Fuel Utilization

Efficiency. For manually controlled

vented heaters, calculate the Annual

Fuel Utilization Efficiency (AFUE) as a

percent and defined as:

AFUE = ri ,

where:

rlu=as defined in section 4.2.5 of this

appendix.

(iv) With the exception of the

modification set forth above, Superior

shall comply in all respects with the

procedures specified in Appendix 0 of

Title 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B.

This Interim Waiver is based upon the

presumed validity of statements and all

allegations submitted by the company.

This Interim Waiver may be removed or

modified at any time upon a

determination that the factual basis

underlying the Application is incorrect.

The Interim Waiver shall remain in

effect for a period of 180 days or until

DOE acts on the Petition for Waiver,

whichever is sooner, and may be

extended for an additional 180-day

period, if necessary.

Superior's Petition for Waiver

requests DOE to grant relief from the

DOE vented home heating equipment

relating to the pilot light and weighted

average steady state efficiency. Superior

seeks (a) to exclude the pilot light

energy consumption in the calculation

of AFUE, and (b) to determine the

weighted average steady state efficiency

used in the calculation of AFUE at a

minimum fuel input rate of two-thirds

of the maximum fuel input rate instead

of the specified ±5 percent of 50 percent

of the maximum fuel input rate.

Pursuant to paragraph (b) of Title 10

CFR Part 430.27, the Department is

hereby publishing the "Petition for

Waiver."

The Petition contains confidential

company information; thus, the

confidential product performance data

provided in Superior's January 12, 1996

submission is not being published. The

Department solicits comments, data,

and information respecting the Petition.

Issued in Washington, DC.

February 1, 1996.

Christine A. Ervin,

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy.

August 30, 1995

The Honorable Christine Ervin,

5757

Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency &

Renewable Energy, United States

Department of Energy, Forrestal

Building, 1000 Independence Avenue

SW, Washington, D.C. 20585

RE: Petition for Waiver and Application for

Interim Waiver

Dear Secretary Ervin: Superior Fireplace

Company is requesting you to accept two

waivers as listed below, concerning Title 10

Code of Federal Regulations 430.27, as

amended 14 November 1986.

These waivers are requested for model GI3821, DSH-36T.

1. This waiver request refers to section

3.1.1.-Gas fueled vented home heating

equipment and section 4.2.4-Weightedaverage steady-state efficiency which states

that for manually controlled heaters with

various input rates the weighted-average

steady-state efficiency is measured at a fuel

input rate of ±5 percent of 50 percent of the

maximum fuel input rate. In fact the above

appliances have a gas control that comes

with a variable pressure regulator control

knob which can be adjusted from the

maximum input rate to the minimum input

rate. Specifically, Natural gas control knob

has adjustment of manifold pressure from

3.5" W.C. to 2.5" W.C. and for Propane from

10.0" W.C. to 6.4" W.C. These pressure

ranges allow the users to vary the fuel input

rate as shown below in the table. It is

impossible to achieve the fuel input rate of

50% according to the manufacturer's

installation instructions. Because the above

models cannot be operated at 50% of the

maximum fuel input and usually operated at

maximum fuel input rate we request that this

requirement be modified to 80% of the

difference between the maximum fuel input

rate and the minimum fuel input rate.

Maximum Minimum Percentage

rate BTUH rate BTUH maximum Manifold pressure

rate

GI-3821-N ......................................................................................................... 38000 30000 79 3.5-2.2 W.C.

GI-3821-P ......................................................................................................... 34000 26000 76 10-6.4 W.C.

DSH-36T-N ....................................................................................................... 27000 21000 77 3.5-2.2 W.C.

DSH-36T-P ....................................................................................................... 25000 20000 80 10-6.4 W.C.

2. Second waiver refers to section 3.5-

Pilot Light Measurement and section 4.26-

Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency. This

section requires the calculation of the pilot

light energy to be figured in for calculation

of AFUE if the pilot is in operation all the

time. The gas control knob on these

appliances have three settings-"OFF,"

"ON" and "PILOT". The pilot can be lighted

with the piezo igniter when the gas control

knob is turned and depressed at the "PILOT"

position. Once the pilot is lighted, it will heat

the thermopile which generates enough

voltage to the gas control valve to have the

pilot remain lit. The gas control knob can

then be turned to the "ON" position for the

main burner to turn on. Instructions and

labels next to the control will require users

to turn the gas control knob to the "OFF"

position during the off cycle will be

provided. Therefore, additional energy will

be conserved. Since the current test

procedure does not allow any credit given in

the calculations for AFUE for saving energy

from the pilot during the off cycle, we

request that the requirement to include

energy input to the pilot light in the AFUE

calculation be waived for these appliances.

Copies of confidential test data confirming

the energy savings will be forwarded to you

upon request.

Superior Fireplace Company is confident

that both waivers will be granted since

similar waivers have been granted in the past

to Appalachian Stove and Fabricators, Inc.

and Valor Incorporated.

A copy of this petition for waiver and

Application for Interim Waiver is being sent

to the manufacturers that produce similar

products in the U.S.A.

Sincerely,

Hardial Gore,

Sr. Project Engineer.

Nov. 30, 1995

The Honorable Christine Ervin,

Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency &

Renewable Energy, United States

Department of Energy, Forrestal

Building, 1000 Independence Avenue

SW., Washington, D.C. 20585

RE: Amendment to Petition for Waiver and

Application for Interim Waiver

 CAS-RM-79-104 COMMENT 140
5758 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 1996 / Notices

Dear Secretary Ervin: In order to expedite

the approval to petition for waiver and

application for interim waiver requested in

my letter dated Aug. 30th 1995, Superior

Fireplaces Company is ready to accept the

changes to the first waiver as follows:

Superior Fireplaces Company will adopt

the test procedure proposed by DOE on 23

August, 1993.58 FR 44538. Accordingly, we

request to calculate the weighted average

steady state efficiency using the minimum

obtainable fuel input rate provided this rate

is no greater than 2/3 the maximum input rate

of the fireplace. Specifically, the models

included in this request will be tested at 2/3

of the maximum fuel input rate.

The second waiver requested in my first

letter will remain unchanged.

We are very confident that both of these

waivers will be granted since similar waivers

have been granted to the other

manufacturers.

Sincerely,

Hardial Gore,

Sr. Project Engineer.

January 12, 1996

The Honorable Christine Ervin, Assistant

Secretary for Energy, Efficiency &

Renewable Energy, United States

Department of Energy, Forrestal

Building, 1000 Independence Avenue,

SW., Washington, D.C. 20585

RE: Additional information to Petition for

Waiver and Application for Interim

Waiver

Dear Secretary Ervin: Recent conversations

with William Hui prompted me to send you

the following information requested by the

committee.

Per your first request following is a list of

companies that Superior knows make similar

products namely Heat and Glow, Majestic,

Heatilator, CFM, Vermont Castings,

Appalachian Stove and Fabricators, Inc. and

Valor Incorporated.

Per your second request below is a table

that shows a general trend of increase in

efficiency as the input is increased. This

information is confidential; please do not

publish. This data was gathered from a DVH33R model.

CONFIDENTIAL

As discussed with Mr. Hui we would like

to add additional models DVH-33R, DVH33T, DVA-33R, DVA-33T to the list for

approval besides the GI 3821 and DSH-36T.

If you have any questions please feel free

to contact me.

Sincerely,

Hardial Gore,

Sr. Project Engineer, Gas Products.

[FR Doc. 96-3056 Filed 2-13-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-M

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RP95-408-000 and RP95-408-

001]

Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.;

Notice of Rescheduled Settlement

Conference

February 8, 1996.

Take notice that the informal

settlement conference scheduled for

Wednesday, February 14, 1996, in this

proceeding has been rescheduled to

Thursday, February 22, 1996, at 10:00

a.m. The settlement conference will be

convened at the offices of the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,

for the purpose of exploring the possible

settlement of the above referenced

docket.

Any party, as defined by 18 CFR

385.102(c), or any participant as defined

in 18 CFR 385.102(b), is invited to

attend. Persons wishing to become a

party must move to intervene and

receive intervenor status pursuant to the

Commission's Regulations (18 CFR

385.214).

For additional information, contact

Thomas J. Burgess at 208-2058 or David R.

Cain at 208-0917.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96-3229 Filed 2-13-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M

[Docket No. ER96-404-000]

Questar Energy Trading Company;

Notice of Issuance of Order

February 9, 1996.

On November 20, 1995, as amended

December 22, 1995, Questar Energy

Trading Company (Questar) submitted

for filing a rate schedule under which

Questar will engage in wholesale

electric power and energy transactions

as a marketer. Questar also requested

waiver of various Commission

regulations. In particular, Questar

requested that the Commission grant

blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34

of all future issuances of securities and

assumptions of liability by Questar.

On January 29, 1996, pursuant to

delegated authority, the Director,

Division of Applications, Office of

Electric Power Regulation, granted

requests for blanket approval under Part

34, subject to the following:

Within thirty days of the date of the

order, any person desiring to be heard

or to protest the blanket approval of

issuances of securities or assumptions of

liability by Questar should file a motion

to intervene or protest with the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,

in accordance with Rules 211 and 214

of the Commission's Rules of Practice

and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and

385.214).

Absent a request for hearing within

this period, Questar is authorized to

issue securities and assume obligations

or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser,

surety, or otherwise in respect of any

security of another person; provided

that such issuance or assumption is for

some lawful object within the corporate

purposes of the applicant, and

compatible with the public interest, and

is reasonably necessary or appropriate

for such purposes.

The Commission reserves the right to

require a further showing that neither

public nor private interests will be

adversely affected by continued

approval of Questar's issuance of

securities or assumptions of liability.

Notice is hereby given that the

deadline for filing motions to intervene

or protests, as set forth above, is

February 28, 1996. Copies of the full

text of the order are available from the

Commission's Public Reference Branch,

888 First Street NE., Washington, DC

20426.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96-3312 Filed 2-13-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M

[Docket No. ER95-1787-000]

Texaco Natural Gas Inc .; Notice of

Issuance of Order

February 9, 1996.

On September 18, 1995, as amended

November 1, 1995 and November 29,

1995, Texaco Natural Gas Inc. (Texaco)

submitted for filing a rate schedule

under which Texaco will engage in

wholesale electric power and energy

transactions as a marketer. Texaco also

requested waiver of various Commission

regulations. In particular, Texaco

requested that the Commission grant

blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34

of all future issuances of securities and

assumptions of liability by Texaco.

On January 25, 1996, pursuant to

delegated authority, the Director,

Division of Applications, Office of

Electric Power Regulation, granted

requests for blanket approval under Part

34, subject to the following:

Within thirty days of the date of the

order, any person desiring to be heard

or to protest the blanket approval of

issuances of securities or assumptions of

liability by Texaco should file a motion

 CAS-RM-79-104 COMMENT 140